English Can Be A Funny Language

I kinda feel like I’m beating a dead horse even revisiting this, but this was really too interesting to pass up.  Those of you who keep up with my blog may recall my award winning post on the guardhouse issue.  I did that waaay back last summer.  Since then it’s become a standard talking point for deJongh opponents.  In early January, the Department of the Interior’s Office of the Inspector General released a report based on their investigation of the matter.

We found that the funds used for the purpose of providing security at your private residence were set aside for road repairs in the Virgin Islands by the Legislative Branch of Government. In using those funds, the Executive Branch of Government improperly diverted roughly half-a-million dollars of specifically earmarked public funds and usurped the authority of the Legislative Branch of Government. Under Virgin Islands law, only the Legislature is authorized to determine how public funds can be spent. - Mary L. Kendall, Acting Inspector General

deJongh opponents rejoiced.  Many felt vindicated.  At last!  Proof that the Governor stole public funds for his own benefit.  The taunting kicked into full gear at this point.

The problem was there was a glaring discrepancy with the IG report.  A lot of people were so caught up in the conclusion that they didn’t really pay attention to what Act 6917 actually said.  But the Governor and his team did and pretty much schooled the OIG in their response.  Just for clarification, here’s the phrase as it appears in Act 6917:

SECTION 17.  The sum of $1,305,000 is appropriated in the fiscal year ending September 30, 2007, from the savings realized in SECTION 16 to the Department of Public Works for engineering designs, construction, repairs or the resurfacing of roads.  The sum remains available until expended.

Now I’m no grammar expert, but I think I was pretty well trained as a writer in college.  If I were writing that statement and I wanted everything specific to roads I would have written it as follows:

SECTION 17.  The sum of $1,305,000 is appropriated in the fiscal year ending September 30, 2007, from the savings realized in SECTION 16 to the Department of Public Works for engineering, constructing, repairing or the resurfacing of roads.  The sum remains available until expended.

Makes sense right?  But it’s not written that way.  The way it’s currently written on the books clearly refers to 4 separate items: 1. engineering designs, 2. construction, 3. repairs and 4. resurfacing of roads.  Anyone with writing experience will tell you that.  One op-ed writer makes the distinction using an old description of a panda (I can recall a raunchier version of that story but I won’t repeat it here).  Sure you can call Senator Dowe and ask him what the intent of the legislation was but intent counts for squat.  Once it’s in black and white the language is subject to literal interpretation.

So two things.  First, how did a federal office make such a huge oversight?  Second, I hope everyone in the Senate is paying attention as to how language can come back to haunt you.  Remember how crazy things got after the constitutional convention election?